алсааас [she/they]

🗣️🇩🇪🇷🇺🇬🇧

ur local depressed transfem, mostly here to liquidate years of piled up meme reserves

also on:

Feel free to message me on Matrix if you want to mod one of the coms listed here

  • 9 Posts
  • 29 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 17th, 2023

help-circle







  • “Here you see one of the prime examples of a lemmy.world liberal turned xenophobe. Swallowing up the hate towards current enemy of the USA and projecting it onto everything they don’t like”

    Like I don’t think the .ml admins are remotely in the right, but politically illiterate libs seeing ghosts everywhere is funny af
    (or at least it would be if they didn’t generalize everything evil in this world on Russians or Chinese and dominate one of the largest Lemmy instances)

    - Yours truly, an actually Russian person with a migration background <3


  • I must admit that I am not well informed enough about Hamas to form an opinion of them specifically. For that I would have to verify claims of genocidal tendencies. Though the Palestinian struggle against settler-colonialism is a most important one, it is a shame that it is not even led by a vaguely progressive force.

    But as you said we should take what we can get. I also concur that social democracy in South America (or the pink tide as it is called sometimes) like in Bolivia, Venezuela or recently Brazil are a generally positive development in weakening the imperial core and might also improve the material situation of millions.

    However, even more socialist movements like the Bolivar one have class collaborationist tendencies, which go faaar deper than e.g. the temporary Maoist compromise with the national bourgeoisie. IIrc even the CPV (of Venezuela) has broken with the PSUV in the era of Maduro, despite having staunchly supported it (and it’s presecessors) in the Chavez era before. The PSUV even initiated a party coup recently through a Venezuelan court, reinstating a collaborationist CK in the CPV…

    I am torn in the sense that reformism (read: so called “democratic socialism”) has failed time and time again to make an honest switch to socialism. But that it either was never even genuine to begin with and thus converted back to social democracy or was destroyed by either internal reaction (through not having class struggle in favour of the working classes, allowing for reactionary ones to initiate an overthrow), international reaction (spearheaded by the likes of the CIA) or both. Tho “democratic socialism” never truly challenges the bourgeoisie in the first place. (only nationalizing key industries and somehow magically hoping the oppressors will give power up voluntarily.)

    I fully understand that material conditions from massive economic and diplomatic pressure lead to shortages and shortcomings, leading to some kind of compromise. It would be “forgiven” imo (idk if that is the right wording, sounds weird tbh but I hope it makes sense) if they’d compromise from even an approximately Marxist position like Cuba, but they don’t never truly overcoming capitalism.

    But as I said, their struggle for sovereignty and against (us-)imperialism is commendable.
    And often is a progressive step forward.

    However, I simply can not hold China up to the same standard. Not with it’s size and weight, it’s former influence and dedication (despite a complete cut of soviet support and massive pressure, I might add. Under which it is “acceptable” for geopolitically “weaker” movements to deepen compromise).

    After the counterrevolutionary coup of Hua (in favour of Deng) it has only been regression after regression. From a bastion of revolutionary Marxism to a bourgeois state of a new type.
    Don’t get me wrong, the CPC succeeded in what the CPSU failed to do: preserve the caste of party bureaucracy in the transition to capitalism, with them partially taking up the role of the bourgeoisie; although in a far more (sometimes also ruthlessly) efficient form. (I mean sometimes more ruthless than the South Korean, Singaporean or Japanese models from which they partially drew their inspiration. In terms of the treatment of the working classes regarding the “work ethic” for example)

    appreciate your thoughts

    Same to you! Constructive discussion with fellow Marxists helps improve ones pov. Unfortunately, thanks to the infestation of the likes of Hexbear and Lemmygrad, the occurrence of those is limited considerably…


  • Imo just bc the subjugation is financial instead of military in nature, does not mean that it’s preferable, since it remains subjugation nonetheless.

    Idk if that analogy makes sense, but whether you are beat till you collapse, or get the rug pulled from under you, you still end up on the ground.

    I also think that it’s important to keep in mind that social democracy is not a step towards socialism, but away from it. It is the temporary grant of concessions of the ruling elites towards the working classes. It is one of the defense mechanism of capital to keep the masses complacent, always at the cost of the exploitation of others. The other ones would be fascism or post-modern individualist neoliberalism (the latest stage of the US model which is essentially gaslighting the working population psychologically instead of using material means to keep them complacent. Ofc those are fluid and capital often combines various aspects of them).
    But I digress…

    I think it’s similar to WW1 or Russia’s invasion of Ukraine: internationally, Marxists shouldn’t support either side of inter-imperialist conflict and domestically employ revolutionary defeatism where possible

    Also I’d disagree that China has (so to say) “taken a detour from the socialist road”, but entirely abandoned it. The only thing that is left is the hammer and sickle, and the red paint… (even the text of the Internationale is too radical for them, as they only seem to play the instrumental version at the CPC congresses)

    tl;dr: I’d rather not pick between “the lesser” of two hegemonic evils, but reject any form of (neo)-imperialist/-colonialist subjugation.

    (again this became more like a rant and I am not that well read in general)

    also I welcome the change of having a good faith interaction with a more or less like minded Marxist on here :)


  • I’d say that you don’t have to support either side in an inter-imperialist conflict.

    Just because China’s ruling elites have virtually no military bases abroad (compared to the USA), doesn’t mean that they aren’t imperialist. Only that they are “smarter” in that regard.

    To use Jimmy Carters words (about the “smarter”-part):

    “Since 1979, do you know how many times China has been at war with anybody?” Carter asked. “None. And we have stayed at war.” The U.S., he noted, has only enjoyed 16 years of peace in its 242-year history, making the country “the most warlike nation in the history of the world,” Carter said. This is, he said, because of America’s tendency to force other nations to “adopt our American principles.”

    In China, meanwhile, the economic benefits of peace were clear to the eye. “How many miles of high-speed railroad do we have in this country?” he asked. While China has some 18,000 miles of high-speed rail, the U.S. has “wasted, I think, $3 trillion” on military spending. “It’s more than you can imagine. China has not wasted a single penny on war, and that’s why they’re ahead of us. In almost every way.”

    “And I think the difference is if you take $3 trillion and put it in American infrastructure you’d probably have $2 trillion leftover. We’d have high-speed railroad. We’d have bridges that aren’t collapsing, we’d have roads that are maintained properly. Our education system would be as good as that of say South Korea or Hong Kong,” Carter told the congregation.

    China might be a so called “social democracy”. It is, however, - in contrast to the European model - in large parts funded internally: most prominently the coastal cities and their SEZs (special economic zones), which host abhorrent labour/environmental laws, red-tape-cutting corruption and whatever else international investment capital needs (or be it internal one, like the allowing 996 culture at Huawei or Chinas tech sector in general)

    To quote Michael Parenti:

    Regional bureaucrats milk the country dry, extorting graft from the populace and looting local treasuries. Land grabbing in cities and countryside by avaricious developers and corrupt officials at the expense of the populace are almost everyday occurrences. […]

    Workers in China who try to organize labor unions in the corporate dominated “business zones” risk losing their jobs or getting beaten and imprisoned. Millions of business zone workers toil twelve-hour days at subsistence wages. With the health care system now being privatized, free or affordable medical treatment is no longer available for millions. Men have tramped into the cities in search of work, leaving an increasingly impoverished countryside populated by women, children, and the elderly. The suicide rate has increased dramatically, especially among women.

    I’m not sure whether an integrated periphery constitutes imperialism., their export of financial capital, however, definitely does! (eg. their debt traps and following decade-long leases)

    So yes, from my POV the Global South or rather the periphery in general, (unfortunately) have no strong advocate on the geopolitical stage

    (Please bear in mind that I do not claim to have studied the addressed topics in proper detail and all this being my ad hoc take)




  • There is no DoP left in the "P"RC. At best it’s social democracy combined with one of the most brutally efficient capitalist systems of exploitation to date (which from a purely liberal economic pov is quite impressive, but so is Japan)

    (following quotes are not meant as an appeal to authority, but rather me using wording which put it better than I ever could)

    'Politics cannot but have precedence over economics. To argue differently means forgetting the ABC of Marxism.’ ‘Opportunism does not extend the recognition of class struggle to what is the cardinal point, to the period of transition from capitalism to Communism, to the period of the overthrow and the complete abolition of the bourgeoisie.’
    (Lenin, The State and Revolution)

    Mao Zedong also pointed out:

    “Never forget classes and class struggle.” “Stability and unity do not mean writing off class struggle; class struggle is the key link and everything else hinges on it.”

    This was directly levelled at Deng Xiaoping, whom he assessed as follows:

    “This person does not grasp class struggle; he has never referred to this key link. Still his theme of ‘white cat, black cat’, making no distinction between imperialism and Marxism. This tells us that both production and modernization will go astray if we abandon the key link of class struggle, and if we reject the correct, Marxist line and the socialist road. If we follow his revisionist line, we can never develop production but will only sabotage it; we can never achieve socialist modernization but will only degenerate into capitalism!”
    (Notes: “production” as in ‘socialist mode of production’ and “modernization” as in ‘socialist modernization of society’)







  • “You know what would be really interesting to do? Don’t denounce me as a Stalinist but, for example – it’s my old temptation – to rewrote Star Wars… presenting Palpatine and Darth Vader as good progressive egalitarian centralist fighting reactionary feudalist, all the Jedi bullshit. It would tell a completely different story, from the others point. What do they [Jedi] stand for? All that, ‘Republic’, what strange of Republic is when you have a Princess Leila, knights, kings and so on? No, Palpatine the Emperor and Darth Vader, they are - my god - progressive Bonapartist revolutionaries trying to get rid of the old world.”

    From: Žižek on Reshooting Star Wars https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_DroaGggbc

    But tbh I think that if we take the original trilogy, the Rebels are cleary fighting a reactionary imperialist power, ie. an analogy to the Vietnam war